mead berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Youth Not In Revolt
Most Young Germans Opt for Merkel

More good signs for Angela Merkel: according to a new poll, the German chancellor is strongly outperforming her rival Martin Schulz, especially in the youth demographic. Reuters:

Among all potential voters, Merkel had 43 percent support, compared to 32 percent for Martin Schulz, the chancellor candidate for the center-left Social Democrats (SPD). But that lead extended to 47 percent against 29 percent among young voters aged 18 to 21, the poll showed.

“Young people know Chancellor Merkel, with whom they grew up, but not the candidate Schulz,” said Manfred Guellner, who heads the Forsa institute. He said the latest data showed that “especially young people are looking for stability and continuity in these uncertain times.”

Of course, young Germans have good reason to value stability: unlike many European youth, Merkel’s policies are working for them. Youth unemployment in Germany is a mere 6.6%, compared with 23.6% in France and 35.2% in Italy. It’s small wonder, then, that anti-establishment fervor has failed to capture German youth the way it has young voters in France and Italy.

In any case, Merkel’s strong showing should be welcomed by Washington—if only because her rival is already signaling that he would be less than cooperative with the Trump administration. EU Observer:

Martin Schulz, the centre-left contender to become Germany’s next chancellor, said he would not pursue policies to achieve an increase of defence spending as agreed with Nato allies. […]

“That can definitely not be the goal of a government led by me,” said Schulz at a press conference on Monday (10 April).

There are reasons to doubt that even a Merkel-led government can speedily increase its defense spending, but given Merkel’s stated commitment to the 2% spending goal and Schulz’s disdain for it, President Trump may find himself quietly rooting for a Merkel victory come September.

Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • Suzy Dixon

    Fantastic. Looking forward to more “Russia is a huge threat!” but “oh no, we can’t commit 2% GDP to NATO.” Also, more axe attacks and religion of peace trucks on the way.

    • Unelected Leader

      Abdullah Merkel is excited for all that

    • Observe&Report

      Schulz would be worse. He built his career in Brussels and is well to the left of Merkel on almost every issue. I hate to say it, but Merkel is the lesser of two evils.

  • D4x
  • D4x

    After speaking today with PM May and Chancellor Merkel, POTUS Trump signed the accession of Montenegro to NATO, with a carefully worded statement that sent another timely message to Putin’s Russia, the bipartisan U.S. Senate, NATO, Europe, and the Western Balkans:

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/04/11/statement-press-secretary-montenegros-nato-accession-protocol
    April 11, 2017 Statement by the Press Secretary on Montenegro’s NATO Accession Protocol

    “Today, President Donald J. Trump signed the United States instrument of ratification of the Protocol for Montenegro’s accession to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). This followed the Senate’s March 28 overwhelming and bipartisan vote of advice and consent in support of ratification.

    Since its inception in 1949, the NATO Alliance has been central to ensuring peace and security on the European continent. It is an alliance not only of shared interests but of shared values. President Trump looks forward to the May 25 NATO Leaders Meeting in
    Brussels and the opportunity to reaffirm those fundamental and enduring transatlantic values. Montenegro will be there as well, signaling to other NATO aspirants that the door to membership in the Euro-Atlantic community of nations remains open and that countries in the Western Balkans are free to choose their own future and select their own partners without outside interference or intimidation.

    The United States will work to further strengthen our already strong relationship with Montenegro and looks forward to formally
    welcoming the country as the twenty-ninth member of the NATO Alliance. President Trump congratulates the Montenegrin people for their resilience and their demonstrated commitment to NATO’s democratic values.”

  • Beauceron

    How could anyone, especially young people, vote for the woman who single-handedly, and by executive fiat, destroyed her country?

    Long term, Angela Merkel has done more harm to Germany and the German people than Hitler, and future generations will judge her harshly.

    • Tom

      That last paragraph is utterly ludicrous, seeing as it was Hitler who put Germany into a place where it thought it needs to atone for the Holocaust–never mind killing off between 6-8 million Germans, which is much worse than the potential consequences of Merkel’s (admittedly foolhardy) immigration policy.

      • Beauceron

        He sure did. Don’t think my comment dismissive of the damage Hitler did.

        And 60 years after, there is still a Germany. There is still a German people and a German culture.

        There won’t be a Germany in 60 years– at least not as we’ve known it.

        It’s gone now. Just as there won’t be a France or an Italy or a Belgium or a Spain.

        *shrug*

        While there are countries that are in far worse positions than Germany (France and Belgium — and the US for that matter), Germany will have a population that is around 25%-30% muslim in 40 years. At a certain point, when you change the people that much, you change the culture as well.

        https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9892/germany-muslims-demographic

        I know from past exchanges that you think that’s a magnificent thing, Tom. Diversity is our greatest strength, and all that. You think, no doubt, that I am exaggerating or being overwrought on the subject. I think you naïve at best, destructive at worst.

        • Tom

          “I know from past exchanges that you think that’s a magnificent thing, Tom. ”

          No, you don’t know that, because you’ve never bothered to actually understand my arguments, which have consistently been that your doom and gloom “The Muslims are coming” ravings are based on bad demographics and worse sociology.

          • Beauceron

            “No, you don’t know that, because you’ve never bothered to actually understand my arguments”

            But I do. There are people that make those arguments far better than you– and it is, after all, the prevailing narrative, so those arguments are easy to find. “Everything’s going to be fine. It’s a good thing. Diversity is our greatest strength. To disagree is to be xenophobic, or racist– or Islamophobic.” They are not complicated arguments and the narrative is strictly enforced.

            “your doom and gloom “The Muslims are coming” ravings are based on bad demographics and worse sociology”

            Of course, they’re not my surveys. If you have some insight into the demographic predictions linked to above, do tell. They are, as the author reports, extrapolated from a Pew Research Center study, and supplemented by a report by the Bavarian Association of Municipalities that says the muslim population in Germany could swell to 20 million by 2020 — which would mean 25% would be reached in just three years. So it’s not like I am personally exaggerating for shock value here. The numbers in and of themselves are shocking– at least to me.

            Brussels, the European capital, will be a muslim majority city n just 13 years (http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/we_wont_always_have_brussels.html). Just for clarity, is it your contention that will be a grand and wonderful thing and it won’t have any effect whatsoever on the culture of the city or the country?

          • Tom

            You might want to find where I’ve ever said “diversity is our strength,” or anything of the kind. Go ahead. I’ll wait.

          • Beauceron

            That’s your argument? Semantics?

            No, you have not said, “Diversity is our strength.” That’s a common phrase usually heard when people begin to question the narrative, used hear to summarize those who stake out your position on mass immigration.

            But last week on the global immigration thread, you argued that mass immigration simply meant that “You create a new tribe. A bigger one.” That is to say, that the mass immigration into the US or Europe merely meant a new tribe was being born that melded the people who were living there with the new arrivals into one bigger tribe. When I pointed out that was simply not happening and provided links to examples demonstrating that was not happening, you replied that I was mistaking “small groups of idiots with too much time on their hands with what should be happening.”

            When I pointed out that what you hoped would happen isn’t what is in fact happening, you simply said “You are mistaken.”
            Given that and numerous other threads on this topic where we’ve interacted– disagreeing, but, I think, pretty polite with one another– am I mistaken that you think mass immigration is a positive thing for the society and culture on the receiving end?

            Again, as I’ve said before, my problem is less with the number of immigrants, than it is with the number of immigrants wedded to either a refusal to assimilate, an embrace of Sharia law and culture, or an embrace of leftist post-modernist SJW ideology. It’s the two combined that sends me into a spiral of doom and gloom.

            https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/04/01/global-immigration-then-and-now/

          • Tom

            No, my point was that you actually have to put some effort into creating a bigger tribe. You know, like we did in the United States back around the turn of the century. The thing is we haven’t been putting much effort into that. Instead, the people you’re actually complaining about (not me) have been trying to split people up into smaller and smaller tribes.
            My contention is that mass immigration is, IN AND OF ITSELF, a neutral thing. It can be positive or negative, depending on the circumstances in which it occurs and how the host culture handles the issue.
            Furthermore, I suspect that we’re reaching peak SJW–much as we reached peak campus radicalism back in the 1960s-1970s–and we’re going to see the tide of madness recede soon.

          • Beauceron

            “you actually have to put some effort into creating a bigger tribe. You know, like we did in the United States back around the turn of the century”

            This is something that comes up frequently from the other side in these debates– “we did it in the 18th Century!” First, there is a marked difference assimilating Irish or Italians to the predominantly Anglo culture of the time than it is to, say, assimilate Somalis or Afghans to contemporary Western culture. It’s an apples and orange comparison.

            Which leads me to the second point: You could, prior to the 1990s, expect, even demand, new immigrants assimilate. We aren’t permitted to expect assimilation anymore, much less demand it. It’s a dirty word now. You cannot ask new immigrants to assimilate into the country they have immigrated to. It’s bigoted. It’s racist and narrow minded. You must make room for them.

            “The thing is we haven’t been putting much effort into that. Instead, the people you’re actually complaining about (not me) have been trying to split people up into smaller and smaller tribes.”

            That’s the future. We will become deeply Balkanized societies. And the people I am complaining about aren’t a fringe group as you imply. To the contrary, they are the central players in our cultural theatre–it’s our media, our educational systems, and the Left as a whole, including the Democratic party. They are the dominant cultural force in our society, they are both its heart and its head, irrespective of elections. They form and police opinions. They are running this show, and they are taking us in a dangerous direction in my opinion. And we’ve gone far enough down this road that there is likely no getting off it at this point. People major in ethnic studies and race studies now– they’re professionals, they are community organizers and teachers and commentators and politicians. They’re not giving this up. It’s their life.

            The thing is, it’s gotten to the point where even objecting to the divisiveness is itself racist or xenophobic. If, say, I go to the local La Raza chapter on any college campus and say to them “Hey, you know, you really ought to be preaching oneness and inclusion. Much of what you do is divisive and bad for the country and social cohesion.” I am going to literally get my head kicked in. Objecting to someone who accuses that I am a white supremacist who benefits from white privilege merely by the virtue of my skin color is now itself racist.

            I can’t pretend any longer that is not the case. Five years ago, I would have been with you. It SHOULD be this way. But it’s NOT, and it is moving very much in the opposite direction. It’s foolish to pretend that it isn’t. It’s a willful denial of reality. I try my best not to do that.

            “My contention is that mass immigration is, IN AND OF ITSELF, a neutral thing. It can be positive or negative, depending on the circumstances in which it occurs and how the host culture handles the issue.”

            You cannot ask people to give up their culture and traditions. Your “neutral thing” in fact forces both sides to do that. Masses of Arabs moving to Europe are not going to give up their culture and religion. Both France and the UK– where second and third generation muslims are more conservative than their parents– has demonstrated that. You allow tens of millions of people in– enough to become a quarter, half, eventually even a majority of your country, you permanently change your country. It is very much not a neutral thing.

            “Furthermore, I suspect that we’re reaching peak SJW–much as we reached peak campus radicalism back in the 1960s-1970s–and we’re going to see the tide of madness recede soon.”

            I used to say that quite a lot. I have stopped. I used to see some utter crazy, intellectually indefensible thing from the Left and I’d say “Well this is it, it can’t get worse. It’s downhill from here.” I’ve determined that, for Leftism, there is no peak, or no low. It will go on until they triumph– unless people revolt against them and defeat them. In any case, we certainly did not reach peak campus radicalism back in the 60s-70s. Heck, they are beating professors now. You can’t even speak on campus if your a conservative these days. Look what happened to Heather McDonald last week. She’s no provocateur like Milo. It’s worse now than in the 60s.

          • Tom

            I think you’ve got your rose-colored glasses on regarding the ’60s. The Weathermen ring any bells to you?
            Furthermore, no one is importing tens of millions of Arabs/Muslims:
            UK: Population: 63 million; 87.17% white, 6.92% Asian (includes Pakistanis, Indians, and Chinese), 3% black, 1.98% mixed, .92% other; 59.49% Christian, 4.41% Muslim
            France: On the high end, it’s estimated that there are 4 million first and second generation Maghrebi immigrants in the country, out of a population of 66 million people
            Germany: Somewhere between 2 to 4 million Muslims, out of a population of over seventy million.
            Note that the HIGH end of the migration crisis numbers is somewhere around 3 million.
            United States: less than 4 million Arab Americans out of a population of more than 300 million.

            I mean, seriously. This is not nearly as much of an issue as you seem to think it is.

          • Beauceron

            “UK: Population: 63 million; 87.17% white”

            And 80% ethnic British (I am not sure, if you’re English, a Polish immigrant is any different than a Pakistani immigrant). (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/articles/ethnicityandnationalidentityinenglandandwales/2012-12-11)

            In any case, these numbers increase exponentially. In 2001 it was 92% in 2011 it was 87%. In 2050, the number is predicted to be around 66% (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/13/opinion/englands-last-gasp-of-empire.html?_r=0). One Oxford demographer has predicted whites will be a minority in the UK by 2060 ( (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3613682/RIP-Britain-academic-objectivity-Oxford-Professor-DAVID-COLEMAN-one-country-s-population-experts-says-white-Britons-minority-late-2060s-sooner-current-immigration-trends-continue.html).

            And look at the US. 83.5% in 1970 and now, less than four decades later, 62%. Less than 50% in 2050.

            “France: On the high end, it’s estimated that there are 4 million first and second generation Maghrebi immigrants in the country, out of a population of 66 million people”

            Not sure where those numbers are from–and France is particularly difficult due to declining to count along racial or religious lines. But current estimates are closer to 6 or 6.5 million: “The Muslim population of France was approximately 6.5 million in 2016, or around 10% of the overall population of 66 million.” (https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9791/france-islamization)

            “Germany: Somewhere between 2 to 4 million Muslims, out of a population of over seventy million.”

            The current number of muslims in Germany is difficult to say right now. They range from the low end — the German government says 4 million, some estimates are 7.89 (https://thepolicy.us/1-in-7-14-7-germans-32-younger-are-muslim-3-times-what-angela-merkels-government-claims-681e87e710580). Germany is predicted to be 20% muslim by 2060 (https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9791/france-islamization).

            “This is not nearly as much of an issue as you seem to think it is.”

            It will be a huge issue over the coming decades. It may be THE issue. At least for those who value European culture. You are pollyannaish on the subject, which is part of our problem.

          • Tom

            The French National Institute of Statistics disagrees with you: http://www.insee.fr/fr/themes/tableau.asp?reg_id=0&ref_id=immigrespaysnais

            So do the Germans: http://www.bamf.de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Publikationen/WorkingPapers/wp71-zahl-muslime-deutschland.pdf?__blob=publicationFile%7CStudy

            You’re hyperbolic pessimistic on the topic, which is much more a part of the problem than any pollyannaish tendencies. You throw around phrases like “importing tens of millions of Arabs” when in reality nothing of the sort is happening or has happened. At most, it’s in the millions.

          • Beauceron

            “The French National Institute of Statistics disagrees with you”

            To what specific graph from that rather long list are you referring? It’s tough for me to reply when you link to a site with 30 links in French.

            “So do the Germans”

            Well. No. I state above, “the German government says 4 million.” It’s just that no one believes them. A large part of that reason is that the German government has lied about the numbers before, lied about how many refugees actually came in in 2015, and then lied about not allowing them to bring their families.These discussions would be aided if you actually read what I write and at least skimmed the sites I link to.

            “You’re hyperbolic pessimistic on the topic, which is much more a part of the problem than any pollyannaish tendencies.”

            I am very pessimistic on the topic– but appropriately so.

            “You throw around phrases like “importing tens of millions of Arabs””
            I didn’t say that. YOU said that above. At least be honest. That said, if one were to look at the 20-30 year span in Europe, that would, taking out the “Arab” and replacing it with “muslim,” would certainly be true.

          • Beauceron
    • Pete

      “How could anyone, especially young people, vote for the woman who single-handedly, and by executive fiat, destroyed her country?”

      The young nitwits have been brainwashed in the dogma of multiculturalism.

  • Fat_Man

    The Germans could easily raise their defense spending to a meaningful level, like 4% of GDP. They could write a check payable to the US for the difference between what they spend and the 4% target. We could use that money to restock our military capabilities.

  • Angel Martin

    The “defence” strategy of euro-leftists like Sergeant Schulz:

    -complain about excessive US defence spending
    -proclaim Russia to be an existential threat
    -refuse to fund their own military
    -demand the USA honour its treaties and protect them
    -complain about excessive US defence spending…

  • Jeff77450

    I’m not German and I haven’t been to Germany since ’87, but how *anyone* could vote for her after all the crimes & depravations that the barbarian hoards that she invited in have inflicted on the German people is just beyond me. According to one source they committed upwards of 200,000 crimes in 2015 and again in 2016. Mostly fraud & theft but also assault, rape and a few murders. What is it that the Germans aren’t understanding??

    • M Snow

      I’m not a fan of Merkel but her opponent does seem worse. Kind of reminds me of another electoral choice.

    • Boritz

      Merkel’s movitation in a nutshell is: Look how unNazi-like we are here in Germany. Have you ever seen a country less like the Nazi’s? Ever? What else can we do to be less like the Nazis? Just let me know and I’ll craft a policy around it.

  • Isaiah601

    Maybe it’s the Passover wine talking here, but I see everything that is happening in Germany through the lens of Biblical punishment. Historically, those who have wronged the Jews like the Germans did during WW2 tend to find themselves pretty f#cked. Does the Muslim invasion remind no one else of one of the plagues? the fact that the Germans themselves are welcoming this invasion is, at least to me, another sign that something much bigger is taking place.
    But who knows? I may be just ranting here. But I will say this much…. My family lost a lot of people in the Holocaust. But even I wouldn’t wish Islamic subjugation on the people who have wronged my family. My worst enemy may deserve death, but no living being deserves that.

    • D4x

      Would it change your mind to know it was Kaiser Wilhelm II’s embrace of Islam during WWI that created a direct path to both Hitler, and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, godfather of the PLO? My first thought here was Merkel being a fan of the early spy thriller, “Greenmantle”, but seems one Brit connected more dots in 2014:

      “The Kaiser’s jihad: HAVE you read Greenmantle, the thriller by John Buchan?” By John Lewis-Stempel Sun, Oct 12, 2014

      “…The Kaiser truly did try and organise a jihad targeting Britain during the First World War.

      …Yet German-backed jihad consisted of more than using Turks as soldiers on the battlefield. The British Empire contained more than 100 million civilian Muslims, and the Kaiser vowed to “inflame” them into an uprising against their British rulers.

      The Kaiser’s chief agitator for jihad was Max von Oppenheim, a character who could have come straight out of a Buchan or Indiana Jones yarn.

      Less funny is that Oppenheim continued to stir up trouble in the Middle East until the 1940s. By then Oppenheim, as well as being on the Nazis’ pay-roll, was a close friend of the anti-Semitic grand mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammed Amin al-Husseini.

      The grand mufti’s notorious ruling of 1948, which sanctified the murder of Israelis as a Muslim duty in perpetuity, had as its blue-print Oppenheim’s jihad fatwas from the First World War. There are contemporary mullahs who see the grand mufti as their guiding guru.

      Some of the blame for the Islamic fanaticism that blights the world today belongs to Hajji Wilhelm and his point-man in terrorism, Max von Oppenheim.”
      http://www.express.co.uk/news/history/521532/Kaiser-provoked-Islamic-Holy-war-among-Muslims-soliders-World-War-1

      “Greenmantle (Richard Hannay #2 [Thirty-Nine Steps was #1]) by John BuchanNovember 1915. Richard Hannay is tasked to
      undertake a top secret mission to investigate a plot to create a holy war throughout the Muslim world and draw troops and resources from the Western Front. Hannay must journey through war-torn Europe …”

      http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/161000.Greenmantle

      • Isaiah601

        Once again, I stand in awe of your research skills and knowledge. I didn’t know any of these facts. And like I said, I’m just a slightly hungover Jew who sees a hand of God in everything. But as your well researched answer shows, there’s much I don’t know.

        • D4x

          Have a few macaroons with your Mogen David!

          In all seriousness, the Polish side of my family lost everyone who did not emigrate before the USA cut off immigration in the 1920’s. Still can not sit in a German car without thinking of all of them.

      • Angel Martin

        Extraordinary ! I read the book many years ago as a boy, but didn’t remember the moslem angle.

    • Angel Martin

      “I see everything that is happening in Germany through the lens of Biblical punishment.”

      In the Old Testament, foolish leadership is a sign of God’s curse.

      Also in the Old Testament, a nation losing its independence and being incorporated into a larger empire is a sign of Divine judgement. As is an invasion and conquest by outsiders.

      The feckless “leadership” of Europe (especially Germany) has deliberately done these things to their own countries – submitting themselves to the EU and opening the borders to unlimited numbers of the world’s most undesirable immigrants.

      • Isaiah601

        What you are saying just strengthens my belief.
        I’m also aware that seeing Hand of God in things may be a sign of being… a bit out there. But what can I do? I see what I see. After all, human beings have just their lifetime to experience, while some things take eons to develop.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service